Loading…
· Private foundation
JON AND KATHERINE DART
This foundation does not accept unsolicited requests — it funds preselected organizations.
$50k
Granted FY2024
1
Grants
1
Communities
$50k
Largest
01What you fund
01
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 58% of JON AND KATHERINE DART’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.
02beneath the categories
Past the labels — and the year it shifted
Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.
…and in their own words, year by year
2018
disabledenvironemntal concernsinternational medicalmedical aid
2019
immigrantsinternational medicalmedical aidenvironemntal concerns
2020
international medicalmedical aidenvironemntal concerns
2021
rightsenvironemntal concernsinternational medicalmedical aid
2022
humanitarian aidrightsinternational medicalmedical aidenvironemntal concerns
2023
—
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2024 · 1 grant
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
$50,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
- CERITY PARTNERS FOUNDATION FBO JON & KATHERINE DART DONOR ADVISED FUND$50,000
02The need
04
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
show:
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12% — the area typically sits at 7%. 94% of your dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
03Your edge
repeat funding
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
74%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$334k · 15 repeat orgs$120k to everyone else
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +57% since the first grant, against -59% for the ones you funded once.
15 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2024, 15 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
15
6
Total granted
$334k
$70k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+57%
-59%
Still filing today
47%
17%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $50k went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
EnvironmentHuman ServicesCivil RightsFood & NutritionOther
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as “new.” Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.
Backed again, and grew
- CFCENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS6× · 2017–2022 · $54k · revenue +16%
EARTHJUSTICE6× · 2017–2022 · $54k · revenue +57%- 3350ORG6× · 2017–2022 · $30k · revenue +2%
Funded once
- CPCERITY PARTNERS FOUNDATION - JON & KATHERINE DART DONOR ADVISED FUNDone grant, 2023 · $60k
- UFUSA FOR UNHCRone grant, 2022 · $4k
- RRAICESone grant, 2019 · $3k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
04Your field
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
1
350 Bay Area
We are building a grassroots climate movement in the Bay Area and beyond to eliminate carbon pollution and achieve a clean energy future with racial, economic, and environmental justice.
Environment
2
Rainforest Trust
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and our planet by creating protected reserves.
International
3
Rewild
Re:wild protects and restores the wild to build a thriving earth where all life flourishes.
Animals
4
Grist Magazine Inc
Grist is a nonprofit, independent media organization dedicated to reporting on climate change. Since 1999, we have used the power of journalism to engage the public about the perils of one of the most existential threats we face. We seek…
Environment
5
350ORG Action Fund
350.org action fund is a campaign dedicated to changing the politics of climate change.
Environment
6
NatureServe
NatureServe is the global leader in data, science and technology to conserve biodiversity.
Environment
7
350 Colorado
To work locally to help build a global grassroots movement to solve the climate crisis and transition to a sustainable future.
Environment
8
CarbonPlan
We work collaboratively to build open tools and resources for the evaluation and deployment of robust climate programs. We share analyses through public communication and collaboration with journalists in order to foster effective climate…
Environment
9
Nature for Justice
Mobilize funds and provide the necessary technical resources to leading, in-country organizations working with local, indigenous communities to achieve climate resiliency.
Environment
10
MN350
Mn350 unites minnesotans with the global movement to end the pollution damaging our climate, speed the transition to clean energy, and create a just and healthy future for all.
Environment
11
Witness Inc
Witness helps people use video and technology to protect and defend human rights. the organization operates globally. witness' global team designs solutions, provides guidance, and co-develops strategies that enable human rights defenders…
International
12
Conservation X Labs Inc
Applying technology and innovation to prevent the sixth mass extinction.
Animals
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Earthjustice and the most unlike its peers is 350ORG. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network
9 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Other$263,000Environment$106,500Civil Rights$53,500Food & Nutrition$22,000Human Services$8,500
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organisation JON AND KATHERINE DART funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending — grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12–24 months.
05Through Plinth
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: CANINE SUPPORT TEAMS.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
medium risk
~4 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 9 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
9 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 2.4× since.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 330434821 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on CANINE SUPPORT TEAMS, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- WatchFinancial stability— Roughly 4 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2025; revenue grew over the period.
- On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 0% of their budget — diversified.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to Jon and Katherine Dart?
Find your warmest path to Jon and Katherine Dart through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines